4 

v 


.57 


PuffisM  liy  tte  Stats  Central  Committee  of  tte  California  national  Union  RepMcan  Party. 


BANCROFT   LIBRARY 


RECONSTRUCTION. 


Speech  of  Hon.  Wm.  M.  Stewart, 

OF    NEVADA. 

Delivered  in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  February  3d,  1868. 


Mr.  PRESIDENT  : — I  understand  the  question 
before  the  Senate  to  be  the  resolution  of  instruc- 
tion offered  by  the  Senator  from  Wisconsin, 
[Mr.  DOOLITTLE]  I  call  for  the  reading  of  that 
resolution. 

The  Secretary  read  it,  as  follows  : 

Resolved,  That  the  bill  of  the  House  be  referred  to 
the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary  with  the  following 
instructions : 

And  that  said  committee  be  instructed  in  said  bill 
or  in  any  other  bill  which  may  be  reported  by  them 
having  reference  to  the  question  of  reconstruction,  so 
called,  in  any  of  the  States  not  represented  in  the 
present  Congress  to  insert  the  following  proviso: 

Provided,  nevertheless,  That  upon  an  election  for 
the  ratification  of  any  constitution,  or  of  officers  under 
the  same,  previous  to  its  adoption  in  any  State,  no 
person  not  having  the  qualifications  of  an  elector 
under  the  constitution  and  laws  of  such  State  pre- 
vious to  the  late  rebellion  shall  be  allowed  to  vote, 
unless  he  shall  possess  one  of  the  following  qualifica- 
tions, namely: 

1.  He  shall  have  served  as  a  soldier  in  the  Federal 
Army  for  one  year  or  more  ; 

2.  He  shall  have  sufficient  education  to  read  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States  and  to  subscribe  his 
name  to  an  oath  to  support  the  same  ;  or, 

3.  He  shall  be  seized  in  his  own  right,  or  in  the 
right  of  his  wife,  of  a  freehold  of  the  value  of  two 
hundred  and  fifty  dollar£. 

Mr.  STEWART  —  This  somewhat  remarkable 
proposition  is  evidently  taken  from  the  dispatch 
of  the  President  to  the  provisional  governor  of 
Mississippi  on  the  fifteenth  day  of  August,  18G5, 
which  I  ask  the  Secretary  to  read. 


The  Secretary  read  as  follows  : 

EXECUTIVK  OFFICE, 
WASHINGTON-,  D.  C.,  August  15th,  1865. 
Governor  W.  L.  SHARKEY,  Jackson,  Mississippi  .- 

I  am  gratified  to  see  that  you  have  organized  your 
convention  without  difficulty.  I  hope  that  withoa* 
delay  your  convention  will  amend  your. State  consti- 
tution— abolishing  slavery  and  denying  to  all  future 
Legislatures  the  power  to  legislate  that  there  is  prop- 
erty in  man  ;  also  that  they  will  adopt  the  amendment, 
to  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  abolishing 
slavery.  If  you  could  extend  the  elective  franchise 
to  all  persons  of  color  who  can  rend  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States  in  English  and  write  their  names, 
and  to  all  persons  of  color  who  own  rkal  estate  valued 
at  not  less  than  two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars  and  pay 
taxes  thereon,  you  would  •  completely  disarm  the- 
adversary  and  set  an  example  the  other  States  will 
follow.  This  you  can  do  with  perfect  safety,  and 
you  thus  place  the  Southern  States  in  reference  to 
free  persons  of  color  upon  the  same  basis  with  the 
free  States.  I  hope  and  trust  your  convention  will 
do  this,  and,  as  a  consequence,  the  Radicals,  who  are 
wild  upon  negro  franchise,  will  be  completely  foiled 
in  their  attempt  to  keep  the  Southern  States  from- 
renewing  their  relations  to  the  Union  by  not  accept- 
ing their  Senators  and  Representatives. 

ANDREW  JOHNSON, 
President  of  the  United  States. 

Mr.  STEWART— I  quote  this  dispatch  because 
I  desire  to  call  the  attention  of  the  Senate  and 
of  the  country  to  the  i'act  that  the  President 
and  his  Southern  friends  had  some  common 
"  adversary "  at  that  early  date  whom  he  pro- 
posed to  "disarm."  And  this  adversary  he 
designates  as  the  "Radicals,  wild  upon  negro, 
franchise."  They  are  by  him  to  be  completely 


Senator  Stewart  on  .Reconstruction. 


ures  of  Congress  are  constitutional.  They  have  cm 
tended  from  the  first  that  every  war  measure  was 
unconstitutional,  and  their  position  is  consistent 
and  well  understood.  But  those  who  maintain 
that  it  was  constitutional  to  suppress  the  rebel- 
lion will  find  it  difficult  to  question  the  constitu- 
tionality of  the  law  necessary  for  the  restoration 
of  the  rebel  States.  The  rebels  overthrew  the 
State  governments  and  established  rebel  organi- 
zations. Those  who  admit  the  right  of  the  Gov- 
ernment to  suppress  the  rebellion  will  scarcely 
contend  that  these  rebel  organizations  were 
entitled  to  all  the  rights  and  privileges  of  States 
in  the  Union,  including  the  right  to  be  repre- 
sented in  the  counsels  of  the  nation  and  to  par- 
ticipate in  the  conduct  of  the  war.  But  the 
United  States  overthrew  these  rebel  organiza- 
tions, leaving  neither  rebel  nor  loyal  organizations 
existing  in  these  States.  The  fact  that  no  civil 
governments  of  any  kind  existed  in  the  late  con- 
federacy after  the  suppresssion  of  the  rebellion  is 
as  well  established  as  any  fact  of  history.  Pres- 
ident Johnson  so  declared  in  his  proclamation  of 
May  29th,  1865,  and  no  one  has  ever  questioned 
the  truth  of  that  declaration. 

If  no  civil  governments  existed  it  will  not  be 
denied  that  it  was  necesssary  to  organize  State 
governments  before  any  could  exist.  But  States 
are  organized  by  the  people.  Neither  Congress, 
nor  the  President,  nor  the  Supreme  Court,  nor  all 
three  departments  combined  can  organize  a  State. 
State  governments  must  emanate  from  the  peo- 
ple. But  some  power  in  the  Government  must 
determine  whether  State  organizations  are  prop- 
erly made  and  whether  they  are  republican 
in  form,  and  that  power  is  Congress.  Congress 
may  prescribe  in  an  enabling  act  the  necessary 
conditions  upon  which  a  State  government  would 
be  acceptable,  as  it  has  done  in  regard  to  most  of 
the  new  States  ;  or  it  may  wait  and  admit  or  re- 
ject a  proposed  constitution.  The  enabling  act 
for  Nevada  required  several  conditions  precedent 
to  be  incorporated  in  the  proposed  constitution 
of  the  new  State,  namely  :  slavery  must  be  pro- 
hibited, religious  toleration  must  be  secured,  all 
claim  to  the  public  lands  must  be  renounced,  non- 
residents must  not  be  taxed  more  than  residents, 
and  lands  of  the  United  States  must  not  be  taxed. 


Similar  provisions  may  be  found  in  every  ena- 
bling act  passed  by  Congress.  It  was  never 
supposed  that  stating  these  terms  in  advance  in- 
terfered with  the  right  of  the  people  to  organize 
their  own  State  governments. 

They  might  accept  the  conditions  or  not,  as 
they  pleased.  If  the  people  of  the  proposed 
State  should  omit  them  Congress  could  not  insert 
them  in  the  Constitution,  but  would  be  forced 
either  to  waive  the  conditions  or  make  their 
adoption  a  condition  of  admission,  or  reject 
the  proposed  State.  In  either  case  Congress 
would  be  supported  by  precedents.  Missouri 
presented  a  constitution  which  contained  a  pro- 
vision denying  the  right  of  free  colored  persons 
to  enter  the  State,  and  Congress  admitted  the 
State  upon  condition  that  the  Legislature  would 
pass  a  resolution  agreeing  not  to  enforce  that 
provision  of  her  constitution. 

Nebraska  was  admitted  about  a  year  ago  upon 
condition  that  the  Legislature  would  extend  im- 
partial suffrage  without  regard  to  color. 

In  the  enabling  acts  known  as  the  reconstruc- 
tion measures,  Congress  exercised  the  same  pow- 
ers that  it  did  in  the  enabling  act  for  Nevada  and 
other  States.  It  prescribed  certain  principles 
that  must  be  incorporated  in  the  constitution,  and 
determined  the  qualification  of  voters  in  organ- 
izing a  State.  All  this  was  done  in  the  enabling 
act  for  Nevada. 

The  Senator  from  Pennsylvania  [Mr.  Bucka- 
lew]  could  not  have  examined  these  enabling  acts 
when  he  ventured  the  assertion  that  Congress 
was  organizing  State  governments  in  the  South. 
The  determination  of  the  question  of  what  shall 
be  required  in  the  constitution  of  a  new  State 
must  be  left  to  that  department  of  the  Govern- 
ment which  the  Constitution  authorizes  to  admit 
new  States.  The  language  of  the  Constitution 
is,  "  new  States  may  be  admitted  by  the  Con- 
gress into  the  Union."  The  admission  of  new 
States  is  not  an  executive  or  a  judicial  act,  but  a 
legislative  act.  If  the  proclamation  of  the 
President  by  which  he  authorized  the  formation 
of  a  State  government  in  North  Carolina,  issued 
on  the  twenty-ninth  day  of  May,  1865,  is  to  be 
regarded  in  the  light  of  an  enabling  act  by  which 
Congress  and  the  Supreme  Court  are  to  be 


Senator  Stewart  on  Reconstruction. 


bound,  it  was  an  act  of  unqualified  usurpation. 
It  was  the  performance  of  an  act  delegated  in 
express  terms  to  Congress.  For,  if  the  people 
of  North  Carolina  had  been  deprived  by  the  re- 
bellion of  all  civil  government  as  declared  in  that 
proclamation,  and  a  necessity  had  been  created 
for  a  new  State  organization,  an  enabling  act 
under  which  the  people  might  organize  such  a 
new  government  could  only  be  passed  by  Con- 
gress. On  an  examination  of  this  proclamation 
and  the  various  amendatory  proclamations  and 
conditions  that  were  prescribed  by  the  President, 
it  will  be  seen  that  the  qualification  of  voters  was 
fixed  arbitrarily,  excluding  some  rebels  and  al- 
lowing others  to  vote,  and  excluding  the  entire 
colored  population,  so  as  to  allow  governments 
to  be  organized  by  a  minority  of  the  people,  and 
this  minority  intensely  disloyal.  He  also  pre- 
scribed what  should  be  contained  in  the  new  con- 
stitutions— slavery  should  be  prohibited  and  the 
rebel  debt  repudiated.  I  say,  again,  if  this  proc- 
lamation was  to  be  enforced  upon  the  other  depart- 
ments of  the  Government  as  a  law,  it  was  usurpa- 
tion. But  if  it  was  only  intended  as  a  provisional 
exercise  of  military  power,  subject  to  the  super- 
vision of  Congress,  it  was  wise  or  unwise,  de- 
pending upon  the  merits  of  the  plan  proposed. 
An  assurance  was  given  to  the  country  that  no 
other  construction  would  be  claimed  for  those 
proclamations  in  a  dispatch  to  the  provisional 
Governor  of  Florida,  dated  September  12th, 
1865,  in  the  following  words  : 

DEPARTMENT  OF  STATE, 
WASHINGTON,  September  12,  1865. 

SiR:  Your  Excellency's  letter  of  the  29th  ultimo, 
with  the  accompanying  proclamation,  has  been  re- 
ceived and  submitted  to  the  President. 

The  steps  to  which  it  refers,  toward  reorganizing 
the  government  of  Florida,  seem  to  be  in  the  main 
judicious,  and  good  results  from  them  may  be  hoped 
for.  The  presumption  to  which  the  proclamation  re- 
fers, however,  in  favor  of  insurgents  who  may  wish 
to  vote,  and  who  may  have  applied  for,  but  not  re- 
ceived, their  pardons,  is  not  entirely  approved.  All 
applications  for  pardons  will  be  duly  considered,  and 
will  be  disposed  of  as  soon  as  may  be  practicable.  It 
must,  however,  be  distinctly  understood  that  the  resto- 
ration to  which  your  proclamation  refers  tcill  be 
subject  to  the  decision  of  Congress. 


I  have  the  honor  to  be  your  Excellency  s  obedient 
servant, 

WILLIAM  H.  SEWARD. 

His  Excellency  WILLIAM  MARVIN. 

But  the  subsequent  conduct  of  the  President 
in  attemptihg  to  maintain  this  proclamation  as 
the  paramount  law,  which  Congress  could  neither 
disregard,  repeal,  or  modify,  must  be  admitted  by 
all  impartial  men  as  unwarranted  usurpation  of 
power  delegated  to  another  department. 

But  it  is  said  that  the  Congress  invokes  the 
military  in  aid  of  reconstruction.  It  certainly 
does  provide  military  protection  in  order  that 
the  people  may  act  freely  and  voluntarily.  The 
President  did  the  same,  only  in  a  more  harsh  and 
arbitrary  manner,  governing  the  whole  people  by 
martial  law,  while  a  favored  class  were  organiz- 
ing governments  to  oppress  the  majority.  Why 
is  it  that  neither  the  rebels  nor  peace  Democrats 
make  complaint  against  these  Johnson  organiza- 
tions ?  Why  are  they  treated  as  constitutional  ? 
Is  it  because  they  find  authority  in  that  instru- 
ment to  justify  them  ?  Is  it  because  they  con- 
strue the  Constitution  to  authorize  the  Executive 
to  admit  new  States,  or  to  guaranty  to  each 
State  a  Republican  form  of  government?  Or  is 
it  because  these  organizations  are  rebel,  and  sub- 
serve the  purposes  of  the  peace  Democracy 
better  than  loyal  organizations  would  or 
could  ?  Why  do  they  want  these  provisional 
governments  to  stand  and  be  recognized  as 
States?  Is  it  devotion  to  the  Constitution,  or  to 
party  ? 

The  Senator  from  Pennsylvania  contended 
that  this  Congress  did  not  represent  the  people. 
First,  because  there  had  been  Democratic  gains 
in  several  State  elections  since  the  last  congress- 
ional election ;  and  second,  because  New  England 
and  the  far  West  were  allowed  to  take  part  in 
the  councils  of  the  nation.  As  to  the  first  reason, 
it  is  sufficient  to  say  that  local  causes,  prejudices 
and  official  corruption  in  the  administration  of 
the  revenue  laws  occasioned  dissatisfaction,  as 
indicated  in  the  fall  elections.  But  the  recent 
congressional  election  in  Ohio,  to  fill  the  vacancy 
occasioned  by  the  death  of  Mr.  Hamilton,  indi- 
cates that  the  people  of  that  State  still  adhere  to 
the  congressional  plan.  But  what  right  has  he 
to  say  that  a  Congress  elected  by  the  overwhelm- 


6 


Senator  Stewart  OH  Reconstruction. 


ing  votes  of  the  people  have  no  right  to  speak 
for  their  constituents?  As  to  the  right  of  New 
England  to  full  representation  upon  this  floor, 
what  patriot  dares  question  it  ?  To  New  Eng- 
land the  nation  owe  a  debt  of  gratitude  beyond 
its  capacity  to  pay.  To  New  England  civil 
liberty,  science  and  civilization  owe  more  than 
to  any  other  region  of  three  times  its  extent  upon 
which  the  sun  has  ever  shone.  It  is  the  spirit  of 
New  England  that  gives  life,  energy  and  stabilty 
to  the  whole  nation.  The  sons  of  New  England 
are  found  everywhere,  in  every  State,  in  every 
neighborhood  where  free  schools,  free  churches, 
and  free  speech  are  tolerated  and  protected,  and 
where  enterprise  and  prosperity  find  a  home. 
Who  is  not  proud  of  New  England,  and  who 
would  deprive  her  of  her  full  share  and  responsi- 
bility in  maintaining  free  government  in  the 
United  States  ? 

As  to  Nevada  and  the  sparsely-settled  States 
of  the  West,  the  time  is  not  far  distant  when 
they  will  be  sufficient  in  numbers  and  influence  to 
command  respect.  The  natural  advantages  of 
that  great  country  west  of  the  Rocky  Mountains 
are  being  rapidly  developed  by  an  enterprising 
and  liberty-loving  people.  Nevada  can  afford  to 
endure  the  sneers  of  that  party  who  would  place 
this  country  under  rebel  rule.  She  is  loyal ;  she 
is  rich  in  natural  resources  ;  she  is  contributing 
annually  to  the  wealth  of  the  world  twenty  mil- 
lions of  the  precious  metals  ;  her  mines  are  extens- 
ive and  inexhaustible ;  and  although  she  has 
deserts  and  wastes,  she  has  more  fertile  lands 
than  some  of  the  large  and  populous  States. 
Before  another  census  is  taken,  her  population 
will  far  exceed  the  requirements  of  the  Senator 
from  Pennsylvania  for  the  organization  of  a  new 
State.  At  the  time  of  her  admission,  her  popu- 
lation exceeded  that  of  many  of  the  new  States 
when  admitted ;  and  her  registered  vote  to-day 
exceeds  the  registered  white  vote  in  one,  at  least, 
of  the  ten  rebel  States,  which  the  Senator  is 
anxious  to  receive  on  the  white  rebel  basis,  and 
which  for  twenty  years  was  represented,  by  two 
Senators  on  this  floor.  I  deny  that  the  Repub- 
lican party  in  admitting  new  States  have  departed 
from  the  rule  that  the  Democrats  adopted.  Ne- 
vada, admitted  by  the  Republican  party,  had  a 


population  at  the  time  of  her  admission  equal'to 
the  population  of  Oregon  when  she  was  admitted 
by  the  Democrats.  The  population  of  Nebraska 
sxceeded  that  of  Florida  or  Arkansas. 

But  what  do  the  Democratic  party  propose  ? 
The  party  that  denied  the  right  of  the  Govern- 
ment to  suppress  the  rebellion  ;  that  obstructed 
the  draft;  that  voted  against  supplies  for  the 
army ;  that  declared  the  war  a  failure ;  that  de- 
clared the  emancipation  of  the  slaves  unconstitu- 
tional ?  How  do  they  propose  to  gain  political 
power  from  the  results  of  the  war  ?  Do  they 
propose  to  increase  their  power  by  fair  means  ? 
Examine  their  programme.  Is  there  nothing  in 
it  dictated  by  partizan  zeal  ? 

While  slavery  existed  five  slaves  were  counted 
equal  to  three  American  citizens  in  the  basis  of 
representation.  But  the  rebellion,  which  de- 
stroyed slavery  and  made  four  millions  new 
citizens,  changed  the  basis  of  representation,,  and 
with  the  present  apportionment  increased  the  re- 
presentation of  the  rebel  States  from  fifteen  to 
twenty  members.  But  on  the  Democratic  theory 
the  four  million  colored  persons  in  the  South  are 
first  to  be  denominated  brutes,  and  denied  all  rights 
of  representation  or  self-protection  ;  and  second, 
the  rebels  are  to  have  representation  in  the  Halls 
of  Congress  for  these  four  millions  men.  In 
other  words,  on  all  the  days  in  the  year  save  one 
the  negro  is  set  off  as  one  of  the  beasts  of  the 
field  ;  but  on  the  day  the  census  taker  makes  his 
appearance  he  is  set  up  on  his  hind  legs  and  called 
a  man.  According  to  the  showing  of  the  Sena- 
tor from  Pennsylvania,  the  South  would  be  in- 
debted for  nearly  one-half  of  her  representation 
to  her  colored  population.  The  State  of  South 
Carolina  would  have  more  representation  on 
account  of  her  colored  than  her  white  popula- 
tion. 

The  Republican  party  maintain  that  the  power 
of  the  rebels  to  control  this  Government  ought 
not  to  be  increased,  because  they  attempted  to 
destroy  it ;  that  it  is  unsafe  to  reward  rebellion 
by  this  vast  increase  of  political  power,  and  that 
a  white  man  in  Massachusetts  or  Ohio  is  as  good 
as  a  white  man  in  South  Carolina  or  Florida, 
and  entitled  to  equal  representation.  But  the 
Democratic  theory  is,  that  although  the  black 


Senator  Steivart  on  Reconstruction. 


man  is  unfit  to  vote,  still  he  is  fitted  to  be  repre- 
sented by  rebels,  and  to  make  a  stand-oft'  against 
a  loyal  white  man  of  the  North.  I  do  not  pre- 
tend to  deny  the  fact  that  the  Union  party  de- 
sire to  continue  in  power,  and  the  same  is  true  of 
the  Democratic  party,  and  the  same  has  been 
true  "of  all  parties  from  the  foundation  of  the 
Government. 

But  the  real  question  is,  how  is  the  power  of 
this  Government  to  be  used — for  good  or  evil  ? 
What  are  the  purposes  of  these  two  great  parties  ? 
Who  are  their  leaders  and  who  will  control  their 
destinies?  The  record  of  the  great  mass  of  the 
Democratic  party  is  either  the  record  of  rebels  or 
peace  Democrats.  The  party,  with  all  its  dis- 
cordant elements,  has  been  true  in  its  opposition 
to  every  effort  made  by  the  Government  to  en- 
force the  laws  and  preserve  the  Union.  The 
southern  wing  of  the  party  inaugurated  the  re- 
bellion, while  the  northern  wing  denied  the  right 
of  the  Government  to  repress  it.  Can  any  im- 
portant law,  act,  or  proclamation  for  the  preser- 
vation of  this  Government  be  shown  that  has  not 
been  assailed  alike  by  rebels  and  peace  Demo- 
crats as  unconstitutional  ?  And,  on  the  other 
hand,  has  the  constitutionality  of  the  rebellion 
or  any  act  of  secession  been  violently  assailed  by 
either  wing  of  the  Democracy  ?  What  does  the 
Democratic  party,  reinforced  by  the  Senator  from 
Wisconsin  [Mr.  DOOLITTLE]  and  his  executive 
master,  propose  to  do  if  they  attain  power  ?  They 
are  all  violently  opposed  to  the  fourteenth  article 
of  the  Constitution  proposed  by  the  Thirty-Ninth 
Congress.  Why  are  they  opposed  to  it  ?  Is  it 
not  fair  to  presume  that  they  want  to  do  the 
thing  which  it  prohibits  ?  And  we  have  only  to 
examine  its  provisions  and  see  what  it  does  pro- 
hibit to  understand  what  the  Democratic  party 
with  its  new  recruits  propose  to  do. 

The  first  section  declares  that  all  men  born  in 
the  United  States  are  citizens,  and  secures  to 
every  citizen  of  the  United  States  the  protection 
of  the  laws  in  his  civil  rights.  Why  do  the  con- 
servators of  rebellion  oppose  this  provision  if 
they  intend  that  slavery  shall  be  abolished  and 
all  men  protected  in  person  and  property  ?  Does 
not  the  opposition  they  made  to  the  civil  rights 
bill  indicate  that  they  mean  wrong  and  oppress- 


ion, and  some  form  of  slavery  under  another 
name  ?  Why  has  there  been  such  a  contest  over 
the  question  of  civil  rights  if  the  opposition  were 
willing  to  grant  them  ?  The  country  has  not 
forgotten  the  veto  message  of  the  President,  nor 
his  war  upon  the  constitutional  amendment,  nor 
the  fact  that  the  rebels  refused  to  execute  the 
law.  nor  the  fact  that  the  Johnson  governments 
in  the  South  passed  inhuman  and  cruel  laws 
against  the  colored  man,  nor  the  fact  that  those 
organizations  refused  to  ratify  the  constitutional 
amendment.  The  loyal  people  see  in  all  this  vio- 
lent opposition  to  extending  civil  rights,  the  fixed 
purpose  of  every  wing  and  faction  of  the  obstruc- 
tionists to  reduce  the  negro  to  a  degraded  peon, 
more  wretched  than  a  slave. 

The  second  section  of  the  constitutional  amend- 
ment, provides,  that  if  the  negro  does  not  vote, 
he  shall  not  be  counted  in  the  basis  of  represen- 
tation. But  the  violent  opposition  that  this  sec- 
tion has  received,  shows  a  desperate  determination 
on  the  part  of  the  rebels,  to  off-set  four  millions 
negroes,  without  political  rights,  against  four  mil- 
lions educated,  intelligent  white  men  iu  the  North. 

The  third  section  of  the  constitutional  amend- 
ment, provides,  that  the  national  obligations  in- 
curred in  the  suppression  of  the  rebellion,  shall 
not  be  repudiated,  and  that  the  loyal  North  shall 
neither  be  taxed  to  pay  the  rebel  debt,  nor  to 
compensate  the  rebels  for  emancipated  slaves. 
Why  object  to  this,  unless  the  Democratic  party 
intend  either  to  repudiate  the  Federal  debt,  pay 
the  rebel  debt,  or  compensensate  the  late  slave- 
holders for  emancipation  ?  They  are  willing  to 
put  provisions  of  this  kind  in  State  laws,  and 
perhaps  in  State  constitutions,  all  of  which  can 
be  altered  or  amended  by  themselves.  Is  not  the 
fact,  that  they  will  not  agree  to  place  this  section 
in  the  Constitution,  suspicious,  to  say  the  least, 
and  is  there  anything  in  the  history  of  their  past 
conduct  to  allay  that  suspicion,  or  guaranty  good 
faith  iu  the  future  ? 

The  fourth  section  provides,  that  those,  who" 
previous  to  the  rebellion,  held  any  office  which 
required  them  to  take  an  oath  to  support  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  subse- 
quently participated  in  the  rebellion,  shall  Rot 
hold  office  until  Congress  by  a  two  thirds  vote 


8 


Senator  Stewart  on  Reconstruction. 


removes  the  disability.  What  objection  can  the 
Democratic  party  have  to  this,  unless  they  want 
the  leading  rebels  to  hold  office.  It  deprives  no 
man  of  voting  or  of  any  civil  rights,  but  simply 
excludes  leading  rebels  from  office.  It  applies  to 
bat  a  very  small  class.  The  young  men  are  all 
exempt  from  any  disability  whatever.  The  pro- 
vision is  not  applicable  to  any  person  under 
twenty-nine  years  of  age.  For  to  have  held  office 
previous  to  1 860,  a  man  must  have  been  at  that 
time,  at  least,  twenty-one  years  old,  and  it  is  now 
1868.  making  )Jae  youngest  man  to  whom  the  dis- 
qualification can  apply  at  present  twenty-nine. 
The  Senator  from  Pennsylvania  estimates  the 
Dumber  excluded  from  office,  at  about  three  hund- 
red thousand,  but  the  basis  of  his  calculation  will 
scarcely  bear  investigation.  He  takes  the  census 
report  of  1860  of  the  white  males  over  twenty- 
one,  and  subtracts  from  that  number  the  whites 
who  have  registered  under  the  reconstruction  acts, 
and  makes  the  difference  about  three  hundred 
thousand.  But  he  omits  from  the  calculation 
those  who  were  killed  in  the  war,  those  who  have 
left  the  South,  and  those  who  have  refused  to 
register. 

The  fact  is,  that  there  are  not  more  than  twenty 
or  thirty  thousand  deprived  of  holding  office  in 
the  whole  South,  and  most  of  them  would  be  at 
once  relieved  if  they  would  cease  rebellion  against 
the  lawful  authorities  of  the  Government.  This 
Dumber  is  not  large — not  half  as  many  as  the 
nation  lost  by  starvation  in  rebel  prisons,  under 
the  inhuman  management  of  the  constituted  au- 
thorities of  the  late  confederacy. 

Tennessee  ratified  this  amendment,  and  Con- 
gress ratified  and  gave  legitimacy  to  her  State 
organization.  The  balance  of  the  rebel  States, 
being  under  the  absolute  control  of  those  organi- 
zations, formed  under  the  President's  prescriptive 
policy,  refused  to  comply  with  any  terms.  At 
the  commencement  of  the  session  a  year  ago,  each 
of  the  ten  rebel  provisional  governments  occupied 
a  defiant  attitude  against  the  authority  of  this 
Government.  Only  those  of  the  South  were 
allowed  to  speak  who  would  speak  the  sentiments 
of  the  military  dictator  who  had  usurped  the 
whole  power  of  the  Government  in  all  the  late 
confederacy,  except  Tennessee.  He  told  them  to 


demand  representation  for  themselves,  based  upon 
the  whole  population,  over  half  of  which  was 
disfranchised,  and  they  obeyed ;  he  told  them  to 
demand  office  and  place  for  leading  rebels,  and 
they  obeyed  ;  he  told  them  by  his  acts  to  reduce 
the  negro  by  legislation  to  a  peon,  and  they  obeyed  ; 
he  told  them  to  remain  uncommitted  in  any  irre- 
vocable way,  either  to  the  payment  of  the  nation- 
al debt,  or  the  repudiation  of  the  rebel  debt,  and 
they  obeyed.  He  tolerated  their  persecution  of 
loyal  men,  and  refrained  from  the  execution  of  the 
law,  and  allowed  wrong  and  oppression  and  as- 
sassination to  go  unpunished.  Loyalty  was  truly 
odious  in  the  South.  What  was  to  be  done  ? 
Was  there  auy  power  in  this  Government  to  or- 
ganize those  communities  upon  a  loyal  basis? 
If  there  was,  who  shall  say  that  it  was  not  the 
duty  of  the  last  Congress  to  make  the  effort  ? 

But  it  is  self-evident  that  a  loyal  republican 
government  cannot  be  established  without  a  loyal 
constituency.  Five-sixths  of  the  white  popula- 
tion were  disloyal,  and  consequently  any  govern- 
ment based  upon  white  votes  alone,  must  necessar- 
ily be  hostile  to  the  United  States,  so  that  only 
three  things  were  possible.  First,  let  the  rebels 
dictate  terms,  and  let  loyalty  be  made  odious,  and 
treason  honorable.  This,  Congress  dare  not  do. 
The  second  was,  to  place  the  South  under  perma- 
nent miiitary  rule.  This  was  regarded  as  expen- 
sive and  dangerous  to  our  free  institutions.  The 
third  was,  to  give  all  the  citizens  of  the  United 
States,  black  and  white,  a  fair  chance  to  organ- 
ize loyal  republican  governments,  excluding  only 
a  small  number  that  was  regarded  as  dangerous 
to  the  public  peace.  This  was  done,  and  the 
military  were  required  to  protect  all  the  people 
while  they  were  engaged  in  the  organization  of 
these  governments.  Did  the  Government  possess 
the  constitutional  power  to  do  this  ? 

Upon  the  question  of  the  constitutional  power 
of  Congress  to  pass  these  laws  so  much  has  been 
said,  and  so  well  said,  that  further  comment  would 
seem  unnecessary  ;  but,  inasmuch  as  the  labors 
of  the  Opposition  are  ail  directed  to  the  great 
purpose  of  destroying  confidence  in  Congress,  by 
showing  that  we  disregard  the  Constitution,  I 
will  pursue  the  subject  further,  and  ask  the  Clerk 
to  read  from  Story  on  the  Constitution,  showing 


Senator   Stewart  on  Reconstruction. 


both  the  views  of  Judge  Story  and  Mr.  Madron, 
for  the  larger  portion  of  what  I  desire  to  have 
read  is  a  quotation  from  the  Federalist : 

"  SEC.  1813.  The  fourth  section  of  the  fourth  article 
is  as  follows :  '  The  United  States  shall  guaranty  to 
every  State  in  the  Union  a  republican  form  of  govern- 
ment, and  shall  protect  each  of  them  against  inva- 
sion, and  on  application  of  the  Legislature,  or  of  the 
Executive  when  the  Legislature  cannot  be  convened, 
against  domestic  violence.' 

"  SEC.  1814.  The  want  of  a  provision  of  this  nature 
was  felt  as  a  capital  defect  in  the  plan  of  the  confed- 
eration, as  it  might,  in  its  consequences,  endanger  if 
uot  overthrow  the  Union.  Without  a  guarantee,  the 
assistance  to  be  derived  from  the  national  Government 
in  repelling  domestic  dangers  which  might  threaten 
the  existence  of  the  State  constitutions,  could  not  be 
demanded  as  a  right  from  the  national  Government. 
Usurpation  might  raise  its  standard  and  trample  upon 
the  liberties  of  the  people,  while  the  national  Govern- 
ment could  legally  do  nothing  more  than  behold  the 
encroachment  with  indignation  and  regret.  A  success- 
ful faction  might  erect  a  tyranny  on  the  ruins  of  order 
and  law,  while  no  succor  could  be  constitutionally 
afforded  by  the  Union  to  the  friends  and  supporters  of 
the  Government.  But  this  is  not  all.  The  destruction 
of  the  national  Government  itself,  or  of  neighboring 
States,  might  result  from  a  successful  rebellion  in  a 
single  State.  Who  can  determine  what  would  have 
been  the  issue,  if  the  insurrection  in  Massachusetts,  in 
1787,  had  been  successful,  and  the  malcontents  had 
been  headed  by  a  Caesar  or  a  Cromwell  ?  If  a  des- 
potic or  monarchical  government  were  established  in 
one  State,  it  would  bring  on  the  ruin  of  the  whole 
Republic.  Montesquieu  has  acutely  remarked,  that 
confederate  governments  should  be  formed  only  be- 
tween States  whose  form  of  government  is  not  only 
similar,  but  also  republican. 

"  SEC.  1815.  The  Federalist  has  spoken  with  so 
much  force  and  propriety  upon  this  subject,  that  it  su- 
persedes all  further  reasoning.  '  In  a  confederacy/ 
says  that  work,  '  founded  on  republican  principles, 
and  composed  of  republican  members,  the  superin- 
tending government  ought  clearly  to  possess  authority 
to  defend  the  system  against  aristocratic  or  monarchi- 
cal innovations.  The  more  intimate  the  nature  of 
such  a  union  may  be,  the  greater  interest  have  the 
members  in  the  political  institutions  of  each  other,  and 
the  greater  right  to  insist  that  the  forms  of  govern- 
ment under  which  the  compact  was  entered  into, 
ehor  \  .  be  substantially  maintained.'  " 

The  Opposition  say  that  this  guarantee  has  no 
application  to  the  rebel  States,  but  fail  to  inform 
us  in  what  case  the  guarantee  should  be  executed. 
Their  arguments,  so  far  as  I  am  able  to  under- 


stand them,  treat  this  provision  of  the  Constitu- 
tion as  a  nullity ;  for  if  the  Government  could 
only  exercise  its  sovereign  power  to  guaranty  to 
a  State  a  republican  form  of  government  which 
already  has  one  in  full  operation  and  needs  no 
assistance,  the  grant  of  power  is  useless  and  can 
never  be  exercised.  But  we  believe  that  every 
part  of  the  Constitution  has  some  meaning,  and 
that  the  framers  of  that  instrument  intended 
something  when  they  said  the  United  States 
should  guaranty  to  every  State  in  the  Union  a 
republican  form  of  government.  iMMBOF^ustn-1 

It  seems  to  have  been  regarded  as  possible  by 
the  Convention  that  a  Slate  might  be  overthrown 
and  its  republican  system  destroyed  ;  and  that  in 
such  a  case  it  might  need  aid  from  the  central 
authority  to  maintain  republican  government. 

This  might  occur  in  various  ways.  The  peo- 
ple might  elect  a  king ;  they  might  limit  the 
franchise  to  an  aristocracy  of  nobles ;  they  might 
destroy  all  government  and  create  anarchy. 

These  were  some  of  the  dangers  suggested  at 
the  time  as  a  reason  for  a  grant  of  power. 

The  learned  and  able  Senator  from  Maryland 
[Mr.  JOHNSON]  contended  that  the  rebel  States 
did  not  furnish  a  proper  case  for  the  exercise  of 
this  power,  but  failed  to  tell  us  when  and  how 
the  United  States  should  interfere  to  secure  re- 
publican government  to  a  State  having  no  gov- 
ernment. He  appeared  to  regard  it  in  the  same 
light  that  Buchanan  regarded  secession — a  wrong 
without  a  remedy — damnum  absque  iyijuria. 

First,  he  said  that  the  meaning  of  the  Consti- 
tution was  to  guaranty  an  existing  State  gov- 
ernment, but  he  failed  to  inform  us  what  was 
to  be  done  in  the  case  under  consideration, 
where  there  was  no  civil  government,  and  the 
people  on  account  of  public  enemies  were  unable 
to  form  a  government  republican  in  form.  I 
think,  on  reflection,  that  he  will  be  bound  to  ad- 
mit that  if  anarchy  exists  in  any  State  of  the 
Union  from  whatever  cause,  that  the  United 
States  is  bound  to  guaranty  to  the  people  order 
and  civil  government,  and  to  protect  them  in 
re-organizing  a  republican  form  of  government. 
The  learned  Senator  found  it  also  necessary  to 
deny  that  loyalty  was  inherent  in  a  State  organi- 
zation, and  to  deny  that  each  State  was  to  be 


10 


Senator   Stewart  or)    Reconstruction. 


guarantied  not  only  a  republican  form  of  govern- 
ment, but  a  government  loyal  to  the  United 
States.  Does  he  mean  to  be  understood  to  con- 
tend that  the  United  States  should  not  interfere 
to  prevent  the  organization  of  a  State  govern- 
ment hostile  to  the  Union  ?  This  was  the  whole 
cause  of  the  war.  The  rebels  organized  hostile 
governments  and  made  war  upon  the  United 
States.  Will  it  be  pretended  by  the  Senator 
who  voted  for  the  prosecution  of  the  war  that 
the  Government  had  no  right  to  suppress  these 
hostile  organizations  and  overthrow  them,  and 
that  it  now  has  no  right  to  prevent  the  creation 
of  new  organizations  hostile  to  the  United  States  ? 
But  in  every  argument  made  by  the  Opposition 
it  has  been  contended  that  we  had  no  power  to 
enfranchise  the  negro ;  that  he  was  not  a  voter 
before  the  war.  and  but  few  negroes  were  voters 
at  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution.  The  an- 
swer is  plain  :  he  was  not  then  a  citizen.  Show 
me  a  State  at  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution 
which  had  a  majority,  or  even  a  respectable  mi- 
nority, of  its  citizens  disfranchised,  and  I  can  see 
the  force  of  the  argument.  But  when  by  emanci- 
pation the  negro  became  a  citizen,  if  he  had  been 
left  without  political  rights,  it  would  have  pre- 
sented an  anomaly  unknown  to  the  fathers  of  the 
Eepublic. 

But  it  is  held  by  some  that  "  the  authority  ex- 
tends no  further  than  to  a  guaranty  of  a  repub- 
lican form  of  government  which  supposes  a  pre- 
existing government  of  the  form  which  is  to  be 
guarantied."  I  regard  this  as  a  narrow  view  of 
the  question,  and  do  not  concur  ;  but,  tried  by 
this  test,  has  Congress  exceeded  its  powers  in  ex. 
tending  suffrage  to  the  negro  ?  Before  the  war 
every  male  citizen  over  twenty-one  years  of  age, 
of  sound  mind,  not  guilty  of  crime,  was  allowed  to 
.vote  in  all  the  rebel  States,  Congress  has  not 
included  any  but  citizens.  It  is  true  that  there  is 
a  new  class  of  citizens ;  but  that  did  not  result 
from  the  reconstruction  acts  of  Congress,  but 
from  the  war,  the  emancipation  proclamation, 
and  the  constitutional  amendment  abolishing 
slavery. 

That  amendment,  I  believe,  is  now  treated  as 
a  part  of  the  Constitution,  and  we  follow  the 
Constitution.  Only  white  men  were  citizens  be- 


bre  the  war  in  the  rebel  States,  and  consequently 
only  white  men  voted.  Now  all  men  are  citizens 
and  all  men  vote.  In  each  case  all  citizens  over 
twenty-one  vote,  and  the  reason  why  more  men 
vote  under  the  rule  allowing  citizens  to  vote,  is 
simply  because  there  are  more  citizens ;  so  that, 
so  far  as  voting  is  concerned,  it  is  based  upon 
citizenship,  the  same  as  it  was  before  the  war. 
It  cannot  be  said  that  we  have  changed  the  form 
of  government,  because  more  men  have  become 
citizens  ;  for  if  such  was  the  fact  every  addition 
to  the  number  of  citizens,  from  whatever  cause, 
would  change  the  form  of  a  republican  government. 
Do  those  who  have  argued  that  we  must  not 
change  the  form  of  government  of  South  Caro- 
lina mean  that  we  must  guaranty  them  slavery 
and  all  their  institutions  as  they  existed  before 
the  war  ? 

This  cannot  be  done  without  a  change  of  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States.  What,  then, 
is  to  be  done  ?  Will  it  be  said  that  because  we 
cannot  give  them  slavery  we  cannot  guarantee 
to  them  republican  government.  But  why  not 
guarantee  a  government  on  a  white  basis  to  the 
exclusion  of  all  colored  citizens  ?  That  would  be 
radically  different  from  any  government  South 
Carolina  ever  had.  She  never  had  a  government 
in  which  any  large  class  of  her  citizens  were  dis- 
franchised. It  is  difficult  to  define  exactly  what 
was  meant  by  a  republican  government  by  the 
framers  of  the  Constitution  ;  but  we  have  abun- 
dant evidence  that  they  regarded  it  as  an  essen- 
tial to  such  government  that  it  should  derive  its 
powers  from  the  great  body  of  the  citizens — that 
the  exclusion  from  political  rights  of  any  consid- 
erable number  of  citizens  would  be  anti-republi- 
can. The  following  passage  from  the  Federalist, 
from  the  pen  of  Mr.  Madison,  indicates  what  was 
then  understood  as  essential  to  a  republican  form 
of  government. 

"  If  we  resort  for  a  criterion  to  the  different  prin- 
ciples on  which  different  forms  of  government  are 
established,  we  may  define  a  republic  to  be,  or  at 
least  may  bestow  that  name  on,  a  government  which 
derives  all  its  power^  directly  or  indirctly  from  the 
great  body  of  the  people,  and  is  administered  by 
persons  holding  their  offices  during  pleasure,  for  a 
limited  period,  or  during  good  behavior.  It  is  essen- 
tial to  such  a  government  that  it  be  derived  from  the 


Senator  Stewart  on  Reconstruction. 


11 


great  body  of  the  society,  not  from  an  inconsiderable 
proportion  of  a  favored  class  of  it ;  otherwise  a  hand- 
ful of  tyrannical  nobles,  exercising  their  oppressions 
by  a  delegation  of  their  powers,  might  aspire  to  the 
rank  of  republicans  and  claim  for  their  government 
the  honorable  title  of  republic." 

But  the  power  to  guaranty  a  republican  gov- 
ernment having  been  granted  to  the  United 
States,  and  which  power  can  only  be  exercised 
in  pursuance  of  a  law  of  Congress,  Congress 
must  determine  in  what  case  and  in  what  manner 
the  power  is  to  be  exercised.  The  same  discre- 
tion in  the  use  of  means  must  be  allowed  as  is 
constantly  exercised  in  the  execution  of  all  the 
great  powers  conferred  upon  the  United  States. 

To  say  it  was  unconstitutional  not  to  execute 
the  power  because  some  other  department  thought ' 
it  would  have  been  wise  to  have  executed  it 
differently,  or  not  to  have  executed  it  at  all  un- 
less all  the  world  were  agreed  as  to  the  policy, 
would  deprive  Congress  of  passing  any  law  to 
which  any  objection  could  be  made  on  the  ground 
of  policy.  When  the  power  is  given  Congress 
alone  must  judge  of  the  policy.  But  if  it  is  con- 
tended that  a  majority  of  the  citizens  of  any  of 
the  rebel  States  are  barbarians  and  too  ignorant 
to  be  intrusted  with  the  ballot,  a  very  unfortu- 
nate situation  is  presented.  Congress  must  guar- 
anty a  republican  form  of  government,  and  has 
no  power  to  guaranty  or  permit  any  other  to  exist 
in  a  State ;  but  it  would  be  absurd  to  say  a 
government  of  the  minority  was  a  republic  with- 
in the  meaning  of  the  Constitution.  It  is  the 
majority  that  must  govern  in  a  republic ;  but 
if  that  majority  is  uncivilized  and  incapable  of 
governing  it  simply  proves  that  the  people  are 
not  prepared  for  self-government.  In  that  case 
we  have  the  territory  and  an  uncivilized  people, 
which  we  must  govern  ourselves  until  they  are 
educated  sufficiently  to  organize  their  own  gov- 
ernments. It  is  our  duty  to  guaranty  republican 
governments  in  the  South  ;  but  if  those  who  for- 
merly controlled  the  institutions  of  that  region 
have  so  far  neglected  their  duty  as  to  allow  a 
majority  of  the  people  to  grow  up  as  barbarians, 
it  would  be  unwise  for  us,  if  we  had  the  power, 
to  allow  a  minority,  who  had  so  utterly  failed  in 
the  discharge  of  their  obligations  to  society  as  to 


permit  such  a  state  of  affairs  to  exist,  to  continue 
in  exclusive  control. 

It  is  to  be  hoped,  therefore,  that  the  case  is 
overstated  by  our  opponents,  and  that  it  is  not 
true  that  a  majority  of  the  people  in  any  State 
are  barbarians.  My  own  opinion  is  that  the  col- 
ored man  whom  we  are  urged  to  treat  as  a  beast 
(except  when  the  rebels  want  him  regarded  as  a 
man)  is  quite  as  likely  to  vote  right  as  a  traitor. 
If  the  majority,  on  the  basis  of  manhood'  suffrage, 
are  really  barbarians,  as  the  opposition  contend 
is  the  case,  it  may  be  remembered  by  some  Sen- 
ators on  this  floor  that  the  civilization  of  the 
present  rebel  minority  who  formed  the  majority 
on  the  old  white  basis  was  not  always  the  most 
enlightened,  refined,  or  humane.  The  arguments 
of  the  Opposition  based  upon  the  alleged  uncivil- 
ized condition  of  the  majority  of  the  people  of 
any  State  have  no  tendency  to  prove  that  we 
ought  to  tolerate  rebel  rule.  They  tend  the 
rather  to  establish  the  fact  that  the  majority  are 
unfit  to  govern.  In  that  case  it  would  be  our 
duty  to  govern  them  by  the  military,  and  save 
republican  institutions  from  the  reproach  of  such 
mockery  as  that  would  be  which  would  call  the 
rule  of  a  rebel  minority  a  republican  form  of 
government. 

But  the  Senator  from  Maryland  [Mr.  John- 
son] contends  that  we  have  one  constitution  for 
ourselves  and  another  for  the  rebel  States.  In 
this  he  has  mistaken  our  intentions.  We  have 
always  been  anxious  that  they  should  share  with 
us  the  blessings  of  the  Constitution  and  of  free 
government.  But  they  would  not.  They  sought 
to  destroy  the  Constitution,  but  failed.  Did  we 
then  punish  them  for  treason?  No.  Did  we 
deprive  them  of  their  lands,  of  their  liberty,  of 
the  right  of  suffrage,  of  the  protection  of  the 
law?  No.  We  proposed  a  constitutional  amend- 
ment for  them  and  for  us — an  offer  more  gener- 
ous and  more  magnanimous  than  was  ever  before 
extended  to  a  fallen  foe— but  they  rejected  it. 
They  refused  to  do  justice  and  receive  mercy. 
Justice  and  the  safety  of  this  Republic  requires 
the  passage  of  the  reconstruction  measures  and 
their  rigid  enforcement.  If  there  is  any  cause  of 
complaint  against  these  acts  it  cannot  be  said  we 
did  it.  The  responsibility  must  rest  with  those 


12 


Senator  Stewart  on  Reconstruction. 


who  made  every  other  course  impossible.  The 
responsibility  must  rest  with  the  rebels  who  in- 
augurated the  war — with  the  President  and  the 
Democratic  party  who  advised  them  to  refuse  the 
congressional  plan. 

But  the  Senator  from  Indiana  [Mr.  Hendricks] 
contends  that  the  people  of  a  State  cannot  de- 
stroy their  constitution,  and  appears  to  regard 
the  constitution  as  the  State  organization.  If  he 
means  by  this  that  it  is  impossible  for  the  people 
to  collect  all  the  existing  copies  of  their  con- 
stitution and  burn  them,  he  may  or  he  may 
not  be  correct,  depending  very  much  upon  cir- 
cumstances. But  if  he  means  that  they  have 
no  power  to  change  their  constitution,  or  sub- 
stitute one  constitution  for  another,  he  is  not 
well  informed  of  the  history  of  the  States.  Some 
of  them  have  done  this  half  a  dozen  times,  and  I 
believe  all  the  older  States  have  done  it  as  much 
as  once.  But  if  he  means  that  no  State  has  a 
legal  right  to  withdraw  from  the  Union,  I  fully 
concur.  But  it  by  no  means  follows  from  that 
admission  that  I  am  forced  to  the  conclusion  that 
the  people  of  a  State  cannot  overthrow  a  State 
government  and  create  anarchy  and  confusion,  or 
organize  in  the  place  of  an  existing  State  govern- 
ment a  government  hostile  to  the  United  States. 
For  if  I  were  to  deny  this  the  Senate  would  con- 
clude that  I  was  ignorant  of  the  history  of  the 
late  rebellion.  But  there  is  no  necessity  of  re- 
finement of  reasoning  when  the  facts  are  obvious 
and  universally  admitted. 

The  Senator  from  Indiana  [Mr.  Hendricks] 
admitted  everything  necessary  for  my  purpose 
when  he  said  that  the  practical  relations  of  the 
States  to  the  Federal  Government  were  dis- 
turbed. By  the  practical  relations,  I  suppose, 
may  be  understood  the  exercise  of  those  functions 
which  a  State  in  this  Union  is  permitted  or  re- 
quired to  perform  under  the  Constitution — such 
aa  representation  in  Congress,  the  right  to  sue  in 
the  courts,  the  right  to  participate  in  the  election 
of  President  and  Vice  President,  etc.  Now,  if 
these  States,  from  any  cause,  were  placed  in  a 
condition  where  they  could  not  perform  these 
functions,  it  seems  to  follow  that  that  condition 
must  be  changed  before  the  practical  relations 
can  be  restored.  If  the  people  of  these  States 


were  able  and  competent  to  change  that  condi- 
tion so  as  to  restore  the  practical  relations,  they 
are  the  proper  parties  to  do  it.  But  even  then 
the  .legislative  department  of  the  Government 
must  determine  when  that  change  has  taken  place, 
and  whether  it  is  the  act  of  the  people  before  it 
can  determine  the  identity  of  the  State. 

But  suppose  the  State  is  filled  with  public 
enemies  and  persons  who  have  usurped  power 
and  organized  governments  hostile  to  the  United 
States,  which  are  still  hostile,  making  their  hos- 
tility to  the  Government  the  passport  to  place 
and  power.  Suppose  those  public  enemies  have 
and  exercise  sufficient  power — as  in  the  case  of 
the  South — to  prevent  the  formation  of  republi- 
can governments  friendly  to  the  Union  and  capa- 
ble of  exercising  the  functions  of  States  in  the 
Union.  Is  there  no  power  in  this  Government 
to  restrain  these  public  enemies  and  suppress  their 
power  over  loyal  citizens,  and  give  the  loyal  peo- 
ple an  opportunity  to  reorganize  their  State  gov- 
ernments ?  If  there  is  no  such  power  the  practi- 
cal relations  can  never  be  restored  so  long  as 
rebels  are  rebels,  for  a  hostile  State,  whether  in 
arms  or  not  against  the  Government,  can  have 
no  practical  relations  to  this  Union. 

But  the  Senator  contends  that  Mr.  Lincoln' 
plan  was  to  amend  the  old  constitutions  and 
patch  up  the  old  State  governments.  That  may 
be  so.  Many  republicans  may  have  indulged  the 
idea  that  that  was  possible,  but  experience  has 
shown  that  it  was  not ;  that  the  patching-up 
process  was  a  failure.  The  President  and  the 
rebels  made  that  plan  impossible.  And  we  were 
further  educated  by  the  course  of  events  to  under- 
stand that  rebels  could  not  be  trusted  with  the 
destinies  of  those  States  or  the  control  of  the  lives 
and  property  of  loyal  men.  The  Senator  from 
Indiana,  [Mr.  Heudricks]  however,  regarded 
what  was  said  by  Mr.  Lincoln  and  other  Repub- 
licans in  reference  to  the  practicability  of  restor- 
ing these  States  by  slight  amendments  to  their 
State  constitutions  as  the  declaration  of  a  prin- 
ciple which  could  not  be  changed,  and  a  subject 
upon  which  the  people  could  not  be  educated. 
In  other  words,  we  are  to  be  bound  to  the  repe- 
tition of  experiments  which  have  already  failed  ; 
Congress  is  to  be  prohibited  from  devising  new 


Senator  Stewart  on  Reconstruction. 


13 


measures  for  the  restoration  of  the  Union,  and 
we  are  exultingly  told — You  have  failed.  We 
have  tried  a  great  many  experiments  with  the 
rebels,  which  we  do  not  propose  to  repeat.  We 
do  not  propose  to  establish  any  more  Missouri 
compromise  lines,  nor  to  allow  slavery  to  be  ex- 
tended into  the  Territories,  nor  to  allow  it  to 
exist  in  the  States,  nor  allow  rebels  to  set  up 
State  governments,  nor  allow  them  to  deny  civil 
rights  to  any  citizen  of  the  United  States,  nor 
allow  them  to  commit  any  more  New  Orleans 
massacres,  nor  to  make  loyalty  odious  or  treason 
honorable ;  and  whenever  we  find  that  we  have 
not  adopted  the  right  means  to  restrain  their 
destructive  propensities,  we  shall  devise  others. 
In  the  language  of  Mr.  Lincoln.  "  we  shall  adopt 
new  views  whenever  they  appear  to  be  true 
views." 

We  do  not  expect  that  our  measures  will  be 
satisfactory  to  unrepentant  rebels  or  their  sym- 
pathizers. And  we  acknowledge  no  obli- 
gations to  submit  to  them  the  question  of 
the  constitutionality  of  our  legislation.  But 
the  Senator  from  Indiana  [Mr.  Hendricks] 
claimed  the  right  for  the  Democratic  party  to 
speak  for  themselves,  and  denied  the  right  of  Re- 
publicans to  attribute  to  them  any  purposes 
which  they  do  not  avow.  The  Senator  when  he 
made  this  demand  had  forgotten  the  golden  rule ; 
for  he  attributed  to  the  Republican  party  pur- 
poses and  designs  which  they  deny,  and  but  for 
his  well  known  character  for  candor  it  would  be 
difficult  to  suppose  he  himself  believed  them. 

He  said  that  our  legislation  was  to  secure 
partisan  power  and  not  the  welfare  of  the  coun- 
try. This  we  deny.  He  maintained  that  our 
purpose  was  to  establish  in  the  rebel  States  negro 
supremacy,  which  we  deny,  but  contend  our  only 
object  is  to  secure  republican  governments,  and 
protection  for  all  men  in  life,  liberty,  and  the 
pursuit  of  happiness.  Is  it  possible  that  the 
Senator,  after  laboring  two  hours  and  a  half  to 
show  that  the  Republican  party  was  seeking  to 
destroy  the  Government,  establish  a  dictatorship 
and  perform  a  thousand  atrocities  equally  repug- 
nant to  the  Constitution  and  to  the  laws  of  jus- 
tice and  humanity,  did  really  believe  that  he 
attributed  to  us  no  purposes  or  designs  which  we 


ourselves  do  not  profess  ?  I  attribute  to  the  Demo- 
cratic party  many  evil  purposes  which  no  Senator 
on  this  floor  dare  avow,  and  which  that  party,  with 
all  its  audacity,  dare  not  avow.  Was  it  a  plank 
in  their  platform  that  they  would  resist  the  draft, 
encourage  desertion,  recognize  the  independence 
of  the  southern  confederacy,  or  deny  the  truth  of 
reported  Federal  victories  ?  Do  they  now  openly 
proclaim  that  their  purpose  is  to  place  these 
rebel  States  in  disloyal  hands,  and  admit  Davis 
and  Breckenridge  to  seats  upon  this  floor?  Yet " 
who  does  not  know  that  the  programme  which 
they  advocate  can  have  no  other  result,  and  I 
believe  it  has  no  other  aim  ?  Shall  we  not  warn 
the  country  of  the  result  of  their  policy,  and  say 
they  are  for  rebel  rule — rebel  tyranny  and  peon- 
age in  the  South — when  they  advocate  the  admis- 
sion of  organizations  in  these  rebel  States  con- 
structed of  the  charred  timbers  of  the  confede- 
racy, which  we  thought  had  been  consumed  in 
the  fires  of  the  war? 

But  it  is  said  that  we  should  conciliate  the 
South.  This  has  been  said  from  the  beginning. 
On  the  18th  day  of  January,  1861,  George  H. 
Pendleton,  whose  nomination  by  the  Democratic 
party  for  the  Presidency  seems  probable,  if  in- 
deed it  is  not  already  conceded,  said  : 

"  I  beg  you,  gentlemen,  \vho,  with  me,  represent 
the  northwest,  you  who  with  me  represent  the  State 
of  Ohio,  you  who  with  me  represent  the  city  of  Cin- 
cinnati— I  beg  you,  gentlemen,  to  hear  that  voice.  If 
you  will  not,  if  you  find  conciliation  impossible,  if  your 
differences  are  so  great  that  you  cannot  or  will  not 
reconcile  them,  then,  gentlemen,  Jet  the  seceding  sis- 

:ers  depart  in  peace;  let  them  establish  their  govern- 
ment and  empire,  and  work  out  their  destiny  according 

o  the  wisdom  which  God  has  given  them.' 

In  the  same  speech  he  further  said  : 

"Mr.  Chairman,  I  say  again,  that  my  constituents 
are  in  favor  of  conciliation  ;  they  are  in  favor  of 
peace.  They  love  the  Union  beyond  all  things  ;  but 

f  dissolution  is  inevitable,  they  want  it  in  peace. 
Peace  may  preserve  this  Government;  peace  may 
reconstruct  this  Union ;  peace  will  preserve  friend- 
ship, and  give  us  an  opportunity  for  acts  of  recip- 
rocal kindness  and  good  will.  If  these  Southern 
Slates  cannot  be  conciliated,  and  if  you,  gentlemen, 
cannot  find  it  in  your  hearts  to  grant  their  demands, 

f  they  must  leave  the  family  mansion,  I  vvo'uld  sig- 
nalize their  departure  by  tokens  of  love  ;  I  would 
bid  them  farewell  so  tenderly  that  they  would  for- 


14 


Senator  Stewart  on  Reconstruction. 


ever  be  touched  by  the  recollection  of  it ;  and  if,  in 
the  vicissitudes  of  their  separate  existence,  they  should 
desire  to  come  together  with  us  again  in  one  common 
government,  there  should  be  no  pride  to  be  humiliated, 
there  should  be  no  wound  inflicted  from  my  hand  to 
be  healed.  They  should  come,  and  be  welcome  to 
the  place  they  now  occupy." 

Again  we  are  appealed  to  to  conciliate  the 
South.  What  further  concessions  are  we  called 
upon  to  make  ?  Have  we  not  tried  conciliation 
from  the  foundation  of  the  Government  ?  Have 
we  not  sacrificed  justice  and  humanity  to  ap- 
pease the  vile  passions,  prejudice  and  tyranny 
of  slaveholders  long  enough?  Are  not  our 
statute-books  black  with  enactments  to  rivet 
the  bonds  of  the  slave  ?  Are  not  the  reports  of 
the  highest  judicial  tribunal  disfigured  with  ela- 
borate defences  of  the  slaveholders'  pretensions  ? 
Have  we  not  submitted  long  enough  to  be  slave- 
catchers  for  the  South  ?  Have  we  not  bowed 
low  enough  in  the  dust  in  vain  attemps  to  allay 
their  royal  displeasure  ?  And  after  all  this,  were 
we  not  required  to  make  a  sacrifice  of  life  and 
property  unparalleled  in  modern  history  to  re- 
strain the  wrath  of  these  haughty  rebels,  engen- 
dered only  by  the  election  of  Abraham  Lincoln 
as  President  of  the  United  States?  When  I 
reflect  upon  the  crimes  committed  because  of  his 
first  election,  and  when  I  reflect  upon  the  manner 
of  his  death  because  of  his  second  election,  and 
the  fearful  results  that  have  followed  the  com- 
mission of  that  crime,  I  sometimes  feel  that  the 
power  of  conciliation  was  then  exhausted. 

But  we  did  not  stop  at  the  death  of  Abraham 
Lincoln — we  tried  further  measures  of  concilia- 
tion, and  offered  oblivion  for  the  past  and  a  full 
restoration  to  the  Union  on  terms  so  liberal  and 
magnanimous  as  to  astonish  the  civilized  world, 
and  were  again  repulsed  and  defied.  And  still 
the  Democratic  party  ask  us  to  conciliate  their 
rebel  friends.  They  say  it  is  impossible  to  har- 
monize the  conflicting  opinions  in  this  country 
without  conciliation.  Let  loyalty  then  be  con- 
ciliated. Let  something  be  done  to  soothe  the 
bereaved  and  sorrow-stricken  North.  The  pas- 
sions of  the  human  heart  are  not  monopolized  by 
those  who  sought  to  destroy  the  Government. 
Let  the  rebels  make  some  atonement  for  the 
barbarities  of  Andersonville  and  Libby  prison ! 


Let  them,  at  least,  give  a  pledge  in  the  shape  of 
a  constitutional  amendment  that  the  widows  and 
orphans  of  those  who  have  fallen  shall  not  be 
robbed  of  their  pensions  by  repudiation  of  the 
Federal  debt  through  the  instrumentality  of  rebel 
votes !  Let  the  world  see  by  their  conduct  and 
bearing  that  they  were  not  victorious  in  the  war, 
and  do  not  propose  to  humiliate  our  soldiers  or 
make  loyalty  odious.  Let  the  rebel  press  cease 
to  discharge  its  venom  in  vile  abuse  of  everything 
sacred  to  justice  or  honor.  When  force  is  agi- 
tated let  the  strong  be  conciliated.  When  the 
President  betrays  his  party  and,  as  he  tells  us, 
"  deliberates  much  upon  the  very  serious  and 
important  question"  of  resistance  to  the  laws  for 
the  restoration  of  the  Union,  let  the  scarred 
veterans  of  Grant,  Sherman  and  Sheridan  be 
conciliated.  Let  those  conservatives  who  cry 
"keep  the  peace,"  conciliate  an  insulted  and 
outraged  people.  Those  who  suppressed  the 
rebellion  will  secure  the  fruits  of  victory — peace- 
ably if  they  can — forceibly  if  they  must.  Let 
those  who  believe  the  people  are  actuated  only 
by  prejudice  of  race  against  race,  rte'cho  the 
rebel  war  cry  of  "  negro  equality,"  "  negro  supre- 
macy," and  bend  the  pregnant  hinges  of  the  knee 
to  haughty  rebels  for  office  and  power ;  but  let 
them  take  warning  that  they  will  fall  where  Buch- 
anan fell,  that  they  will  not  only  merit  but  rej 
ceive  the  contempt  of  mankind. 

Disguise  it  as  you  will,  there  are  but  two  sides 
to  this  question — the  unrepentant  rebel  and  the 
loyal.  The  former  are  resolved  either  to  destroy 
this  Government  or  make  it  subservient  to  their 
purposes  ;  the  latter  to  maintain  the  Union  and 
the  Constitution  upon  the  broad  principles  of 
justice  and  humanity.  Let  the  timid  and  time- 
serving politician  and  the  selfish  and  sordid 
slave  of  Mammon.who  have  no  principle,  upon 
whom  the  appeals  of  justice  and  humanity  are 
lost,  consult  their  interest  and  aid  the  side  they 
think  is  most  likely  to  be  successful  at  the  end  of 
the  contest,  although  it  be  continued  for  ages.  For 
if  traitors  can  transmit  to  their  posterity  their 
hatred  to  the  Government,  coming  generations 
will  demonstrate  that  loyalty,  too,  may  be  heredi- 
tary. If  they  think  the  cause  of  rebellion  is  yet  to 
be  triumphant,  and  a  loyal  people  are  to  be  pun- 


National    Union  Republican  Platform. 


15 


ished  for  their  sacrifices  to  sustain  this  Gov- 
ernment, let  them  count  the  cost  of  subjugating 
the  victorious  veterans  whose  honor  is  involved 
when  loyalty  is  insulted  in  the  person  of  the 
humblest  Union  man  that  loves  his  country. 
Mr.  President,  I  have  no  fears  for  the  future. 


I  believe  that  there  is  more  good  than  evil  in 
man.  I  believe  that  a  kind  Provide  nee  is  guard- 
ing the  destinies  of  America  ;  that  the  Republic 
is  to  live,  not  only  in  name,  but  in  fact,  the  pal- 
ladium of  justice,  humanity  and  universal  liberty. 


National  Union  Eepublican  Platform, 


THE  following  was  adopted  by  the  Chicago 
National  Convention  as  the  Platform  of  the 
National  Union  Republican  Party  : 

Resolved,  That  we  congratulate  the  country  on 
the  assured  success  of  the  reconstruction  policy 
of  Congress,  as  evidenced  by  the  adoption  in  a 
majority  of  the  States  lately  in  rebellion  of  a 
Constitution  securing  equal  civil  and  political 
rights  to  all,  and  regard  it  as  the  duty  of  the 
Government  to  sustain  these  Constitutions  and 
prevent  the  people  of  such  States  from  being  re- 
mitted into  a  state  of  anarchy  or  military  rule. 

Resolved,  That  the  guarantee  by  Congress  of 
equal  suffrage  to  all  loyal  men  in  the  South,  was 
demanded  by  every  consideration  of  public  safety, 
gratitude  and  justice,  and  must  be  maintained  ; 
while  the  question  of  suffrage  in  all  the  loyal 
States,  properly  belongs  to  the  people  of  those 
States. 

Resolved,  That  we  denounce  all  forms  of  re- 
pudiation as  a  national  crime,  and  that  the  na- 
tional honor  requires  the  payment  of  the  public 
indebtedness  in  the  utmost  good  faith  to  our 
creditors  at  home  and  abroad,  not  only  according 
to  the  letter  but  the  spirit  of  the  laws  under 
which  it  was  contracted. 

Resolved,  That  it  is  due  to  the  labor  of  the 
nation  that  taxation  should  be  equalized  and 
reduced  as  rapidly  as  the  national  faith  will  per- 
mit. 

Resolved,  That  the  national  debt,  contracted 
as  it  has  been  for  the  preservation  of  the  Union 
for  all  time  to  come,  should  be  extended  over  a 
fair  period,  and  the  rate  of  interest  thereon  re- 
duced whenever  it  can  honestly  be  done. 

Resolved,  That  the  best  policy  to  diminish 
our  burden  of  debt  is  so  to  improve  our  credi' 
that  capitalists  will  seek  to  lend  us  money  a 
lower  rates  of  interest  than  we  now  pay,  and 
must  continue  to  pay  so  long  as  repudiation,  par 
tial  or  total,  open  or  covert,  is  threatened  or  sus 
pected. 


Resolved,  That  the  Government  qf  the  United 
States  should  be  administered  with  the  strictest 
economy,  and  corruptions  which  have  been  so 
shamefully  nursed  and  fostered  by  Andrew  John- 
son, call  loudly  for  a  radical  reform. 

Resolved,  That  we  profoundly  deplore  the  tin 
timely  and  tragic  death'  of  Abraham  Lincoln, 
and  regret  the  accession  of  Andrew  Johnson  to 
the  Presidential  chair,  who  has  acted  treacher- 
ously to  the  people  who  have  elected  him  and  to 
the  cause  he  was  pledged  to  support ;  has  usurped 
high  legislative  and  judicial  functions ;  has  re- 
fused to  execute  the  laws;  has  used  his  high 
office  to  induce  other  officers  to  violate  the  laws  ; 
has  employed  his  executive  power  to  render  in- 
secure the  lives,  property,  peace  and  liberty  of 
citizens ;  has  denounced  the  National  Legisla- 
ture as  unconstitutional ;  has  abused  the  par- 
doning power ;  has  persistently  and  habitually 
resisted  by  every  means  in  his  power  every  pro- 
per attempt  at  reconstruction  of  the  States  lately 
in  rebellion  ;  has  perverted  the  public  patronage 
into  an  engine  of  wholesale  corruption,  and  has 
been  justly  impeached  for  high  crimes  and  mis- 
demeanors, and  pronounced  guilty  thereof  by  the 
votes  of  thirty-five  Senators. 

Resolved,  That  the  doctrine  of  Great  Britain 
and  other  European  powers,  that  because  a  man 
is  once  a  subject  he  is  always  so,  must  be  resisted 
by  the  United  Slates  as'a  relic  of  feudal  times, 
not  authorized  by  the  law  of  nations,  and  at  war 
with  our  national  honor  and  independence.  Nat- 
uralized citizens  are  entitled  to  be  protected  in 
all  their  rights  of  citizenship  as  though  they 
were  native  born  ;  and  no  citizen  of  the  United 
States,  native  or  naturalized,  must  be  liable  to 
arrest  or  imprisonment  by  any  foreign  power  for 
acts  done  or  words  spoken  in  this  country ;  and 
if  so  arrested  and  imprisoned,  it  is  the  duty  of 
the  Government  to  interfere  in  his  behalf. 

Recolved,  That  of  all  who  were  faithful  in  the 
trials  of  the  late  war,  there  were  none  more  fitted 
for  especial  honor  than  the  brave  soldiers  and 


16 


National   Union  RepvMcan  Convention. 


seamen  who  endured  the  hardships  of  camp  and 
cruise,  and  imperiled  their  lives  in  the  service  of 
the  country.  The  bounties  and  pensions  appro- 
priated by  law  for  these  brave  defenders  of  the 
Union  are  obligations  never  to  be  forgotten. 
The  widows  and  orphans  of  the  gallant  dead  are 
the  wards  of  the  people,  a  sacred  legacy  be- 
queathed to  the  protecting  care  of  the  United 
States. 

Resolved,  That  foreign  immigration,  which, 
in  the  past,  has  added  so  much  to  the  wealth  and 
increased  the  resources  of  this  nation — the  asy- 
lum of  all  nations — should  be  fostered  by  a 
liberal  and  just  policy. 

Resolved,  That  this  Convention  declares  its 
sympathy  with  all  oppressed  people  who  are 
struggling  for  their  rights. 

Resolved,  That  we  highly  commend  the  spirit 


of  magnanimity  and  forgiveness  with  which  men 
who  have  served  in  the  rebellion,  and  who  are 
now  frankly  and  honestly  cooperating  with  us 
in  restoring  the  cause  of  the  country,  and  in  the 
reconstruction  of  the  Southern  States  on  a  basis 
of  impartial  justice  and  equal  rights,  are  received 
j  back  into  communion  with  loyal  people,  and  that 
we  are  in  favor  of  the  removal  of  the  disqualifi- 
cations and  restrictions  imposed  upon  the  late 
rebels  in  the  same  measure  as  their  spirit  of  loy- 
alty, and  as  may  be  consistent  with  the  safety  of 
the  loyal  people. 

Resolved,  That  we  recognize  the  great  princi- 
ples laid  down  in  the  Declaration  of  Independ- 
ence as  the  true  foundation  of  a  democratic  gov- 
ernment, and  we  hail  with  gladness  every  effort 
toward  making  these  principles  a  living  reality 
on  every  inch  of  American  soil. 


National  Union   Republican  Convention. 


A  STATE  CONTENTION  OF  THE  NATIONAL   UNION  REPUBLICAN 
PARTY  will  be  held  at  Sacramento  on  the  FIFTH  DAY  OF  AUGUST,  A.D.  1868,  for  the 
purpose  of  Nominating  an  Electoral  Ticket,  to  be  supported  at  the  coming  Presidential  Election, 
and  for  the  transaction  of  such  other  business  as  shall  properly  come  before  said  Convention. 
Delegates  are  apportioned  to  the  several  Counties  as  follows  : 


Alameda  

8 

Kern            

2 

Placer  

...11 

Stanislaus  

2 

2 

K  i  amath 

2 

.  ..  5 

Sutter  

4 

Amador      

6- 

Lake        

2 

Sacramento  

...14 

Sierra  

8 

Butte 

6 

.  2 

Sau  Francisco  

...40 

Siskiyou  

5 

8 

4 

Santa  Cruz    

.  ..  5 

Solano       .    . 

Colu^a 

2 

Mar  in 

3 

Shasta  

...  4 

Sonoma  

..  9 

5 

4 

San  Bernardino  

...  2 

Tehama  

.  .  3 

Del  Norte 

2 

4 

San  Die0'© 

2 

Trinity 

4 

El  Dorado 

9 

2 

San  Joaquin  

.  ..11 

Tuolumno  

Fresn  o 

...  2 

Mono 

2 

San  Louis  Obispo  

2 

Tulare  

2 

Humboldt 

4 

3 

San  Matfo  

...  4 

Yolo  

5 

2 

4 

Santa  Barbara 

.    2 

Yuba  ... 

1  Nevada.  .  .  , 

...14 

Santa  Clara... 

11 

Elections  for  Delegates  are  directed  to  be  held  under  the  provisions  of  the  Primary  flection  Law. 

All  legal  voters  who  will  pledge  themselves  to  support  and  vote  for  the  Electors  chosen  by  said 
Convention,  shall  be  entitled  to  vote  at  said  Primaries. 

It  is  recommended  that  a  GRANT  and  COLFAX  Club  be  formed  on  the  day  of  said  Primary  Elec- 
tion, in  every  Precinct  in  the  State  where  a  Union  Republican  Club  does  not  already  exist. 

Officers  of  Clubs  so  formed  will  report  immediately  to  the  Secretary  of  the  State  Central  Com- 
mittee. 

JAMES  OTIS, 

Chairman  State  Central  Committee 

National  Union  Republican  Party. 
AILFRED  BARSTOW,  Secretary. 


Excelsior  Press  Bacon  &  Company  Printers. 


